Archive for the month “August, 2014”

This month, Ethiopian officials shut down five magazines — the latest in a series of shutdowns — but the move got little attention from outside the country. The East African country is well known for suppressing the media, but some cases seem to get celebrity status while others are ignored.

Twelve Ethiopian journalists and publishers left the country in August after the magazines they worked for were forced by the government to shut down. International media gave little attention to the self-chosen exile of these media practitioners.

In contrast, the cases of Eskinder Nega, Reeyot Alemu and more recently the Zone9 bloggers have been covered by outlets such as al-Jazeera and the BBC, as well as VOA.

Tom Rhodes of the Committee to Protect Journalists, or CPJ, says it can be partly explained why some cases get more attention.

“In the case of the Zone9 bloggers and Eskinder, they were quite well known in the diaspora, the Ethiopian diaspora, and had a lot of international contacts and backers. While other cases unfortunately are not so well known. I think of Solomon Kebede for example who is still waiting for trial,” he said.

Forty-one human rights organizations such as Amnesty International and CPJ released a joint statement calling for the release of the Zone9 bloggers and journalists, who are charged with terrorism.

Amaha Mekonnen, lawyer for the Zone9 bloggers and journalists, said there was a small chance the international attention would have an impact.

“As we have the experience, there may be a chance to settle the matter out of court, in which case, this information, all deliberations and analysis the case of this bloggers and journalist may be used to speed up and finally get a successful results,” said Mekonnen.

Both Eskinder Nega and Reeyot Alemu have been detained under Ethiopia’s controversial Anti-Terrorism Proclamation. Human rights group said the 2009 law was overly vague and allowed authorities to arrest anyone who criticized or opposed the government.

Eskinder won the 2012 PEN American’s Freedom to Write Award while serving an 18-year prison sentence and Reeyot won the UNESCO World Press Freedom Award in 2013 while serving an ongoing five-year prison term.

Reeyot is not allowed to see anyone else besides her parents, for 20 minutes a day.

Her father Alemu Gobebo said the attention was good for the morale of his imprisoned daughter:

“The international media is also encouraging the family of Reeyot, and Reeyot herself. The international media coverage disclosing her strength on freedom of speech or freedom of press, and by that way she was awarded, I think, international prizes. In that case we are very delighted,” he said.

There was always a worry when giving exposure to a case, said Rhodes of CPJ. But he also believed that it was crucial to inform people about what was going on.

“I think it both has a positive and a negative affect,” he said. “Positive in the sense that we let the international community know what’s going on and we’re letting the Ethiopian press know what’s going on. But it’s also negative in the sense that some authorities simply do not like criticism whether its local or international. And may react badly to it.”

Ethiopia ranks 143 out of 180 countries on the most recent World Press Freedom index. A 2014 Human Rights Watch report says Ethiopia is one of the three top countries in the world in terms of the number of exiled journalists.

The trial of the Zone 9 bloggers and journalists will resume October 15.

EMF – Seven of the 10 bloggers are part of a social media group called Zone 9. The group are mostly young urban professionals known for a fresh and reasoned approach to peaceful change — and who are increasingly well-respected – in an authoritarian nation known for a history of stifling free expression. With elections coming, some say the charges are an easy way for the government to link dissidents to terrorist groups and undermine them.

Here below, EMF published the defense argument by bloggers attorney.

Prepared by the attorney of the defendants

On the subject of the manner the charges are presented.

In the first charge the defendants are cited for violating Article 4 of the anti-terrorism law. What described as an alleged act of terrorism in the charge sheet are having a long and a short term goals, participating in trainings, establishing a clandestine organization, expressing their opinion and receiving financial support. However; the charge sheet does not specify which of the seven terrorist acts stipulated in the article 3 of the same anti-terrorism law are committed. In accordance with Article 4 of the anti-terrorism law an act is prosecutable and punishable if they are supported with undisputable evidence and if they are constituted as an element of the crime as stipulated in Article 3 of the proclamation. The statements that are listed in the charge sheet as’ they have willfully joined an undercover enterprise of persons; took part in training; received monetary support are not crimes stipulated in the Article 3 of the proclamation. Hence; this charge signifies serious defects of reasoning, and has incurred incorrect application of the procedural provisions as stated in the Ethiopian law of criminal procedure of article 112.

The activities specified as violations or offenses in the first charge are among the fundamental rights that are protected in Ethiopia’s constitution. According to article 2 of the Ethiopian law of criminal procedure engaging in the activities described as fundamental constitutional rights shall not bring any criminal responsibility. The activities cited as offenses or violations are all fundamental rights to privacy, freedom of thought, freedom opinion and freedom expression and freedom of association as stipulated in Article 26, 29 and 31 of the Ethiopian constitution.

It is mandatory that the judicial, executive and the legislative branches of the Ethiopian government have duties and responsibilities to protect these rights. Additionally, in accordance with the decision of the Court of Cassation on 12th of November 2009, charge sheets must essentially respect these absolutely necessary fundamental constitutional rights. However, in the charge sheet the attorney general/the public prosecutor has tried to present the activities of the accused (participating in trainings, expressing opinion, encrypting their communication, establishing a clandestine organization and receiving financial support) in manner that violated the fundamental constitutional rights of the accused. The attorney general discredits their responsibility and duty to respect and enforce the provisions of the fundamental constitutional rights as stipulated in Article 13 of the Ethiopian constitution. Hence, I argue that, beyond violating the fundamental constitutional rights of the accused the charges are encroachment of the basic procedural rules of the country. Besides; they are illogical in reasoning. Therefore; I ask your honor to grant an outright dismissal to this case.

The details of the crime as they are written in the charge sheet are not understandable. In accordance with the article 111 of the Ethiopian law of criminal procedure the charge sheet must be a core document that describes a crime that has been committed in crisp manner .But the manner in which the charges are written show no compliance with these rules and procedures. In the document that is given as a charge sheet the alleged crimes are presented vaguely. With the exception of the two inadequate references to time (May & August 2012) there is no specific indication of time for the alleged crime. The occasion of the alleged crime and the specific person involved in the alleged crime is never mentioned so that my clients cannot defend themselves accordingly. In essence, I will draw your attention to the following faults and illogical reasoning that are noticeable on the charge sheet as a legal argument in demonstrating why the court should dismiss the case of my clients

In the charge sheet the word ‘group’ and ‘enterprise’ have been used interchangeably. It is not clear whether these words are being used interchangeably as synonyms or being used to refer to two different sets of things.

Legally speaking the use of the term ‘secrete’ in the charge sheet is not clear. It is a highly ambiguous term. It is not a legally recognized term. What does it refer? Does it refer to lack of legal registration for their activities or does it refer to the concealment of their activities? It should have been used in a very clear and unambiguous manner.

The charge sheet never mentioned the name of the organization created by the accused. If the public prosecutor is referring my clients by their collective name called Zone9. They should be notified so that they can defend themselves accordingly

In the charge sheet the public prosecutor allegedly accuse my clients of classifying duties and responsibilities as leadership; research & advocacy; public & foreign relations groups amongst themselves but does not specify who took leadership, research & advocacy; public & foreign relations

The alleged crime of accepting an assignment is vague. Who gave them the assignment? When did they accept the assignment? How did they accept the assignment? What was the assignment? It is not specified in the charge sheet.

In the charge sheet it says the accused took the newsletter of Ginbot7 and the political program of OLF as their own but this does not specify how they made these documents as their own.

Regarding the training the accused took part; it does not specify what kinds of training have they taken part; when did they take? Who gave them? What were the titles of the trainings? Details such as where did they take training? Who gave them? What strategies did they device are never mentioned in the charge sheet.

Regarding the $2400 allegedly the accused particularly Natnael received. Where did he receive the money? Who gave him? When did he receive it? It is not clearly pointed out in the charge sheet.

In the charge sheet the phrase secret leadership of Ginbot7 is not clear. Where this secret leadership is located? Who is the leader of this secret leadership of Ginbot7

Violation of procedural rules and illogical reasoning with respect to this charge has completely distorted the meaning of the activities of the accused. Hence; I kindly ask the esteemed court to grant an outright dismissal to this case and release my clients.

The consecutive rise of two dictatorial and sectarian regimes has convinced a great number of Ethiopians that peaceful rather than armed struggle gives the best opportunity for the democratization of Ethiopia. The experience of armed insurgents instituting sectarian and repressive regimes in Ethiopia as well as in other numerous countries, despite their often widely publicized commitment to justice and democracy, has rooted in most Ethiopians the belief that democracy will never prevail so long as armed groups, which by definition are not accountable to the people, become agents of social changes. Instead, what is needed is to organize, educate, and mobilize the people through peaceful struggle and achieve change by their open and direct involvement. In this way, the people retain the control of change and empower political elites that are primarily both accountable to them and representative of diverse interests. Needless to say, proponents of peaceful struggle know too well that the path is bound to be difficult and fraught with appalling pain and sacrifices, obvious as it is that dictatorial regimes will take extreme measures to discourage and defeat such a movement.

Like most people in Ethiopia, I had so far endorsed both the promises of peaceful struggle and its onerous nature without, however, ever condemning or criticizing those who advocate armed struggle. Not only was I convinced that one cannot separate the means from the goal so that only democratic means can lead to democratic results, but also I persuaded myself that the recourse to armed struggle to overthrow the TPLF would be dangerous to the very existence of Ethiopia. Indeed, the ethnic fragmentation of Ethiopia in the hands of the TPLF could only encourage the proliferation of armed groups that would easily take ethnic banners, thereby precipitating the country into a terrible civil war from which it may not emerge as one country.

On the other hand, I was also perfectly aware of the nature of the TPLF. I never shared the illusion that the TPLF will accept the verdict of the ballot-box and step down from power peacefully. That is why I wrote several papers that many commentators and activists either disliked or labeled controversial in which I argued in favor of the establishment of a national government of reconciliation. The proposal was an attempt to lure the leaders of the TPLF into the democratic process by calming their fear of electoral defeat, which would leave them powerless and venerable to a revengeful policy. I found utterly naïve the belief that the TPLF will play the democratic game when it has so much to lose and nothing to gain. Assurance and confidence building through a transitory process in which the TPLF shares power with the opposition appeared to me as the best way to launch the democratization process.

In the face of mounting opposition, the proposal offered an incentive to the TPLF, namely, the opening of the political field in exchange for a guarantee against complete loss and vindictive actions, the result of which would be a win-win situation for all concerned. The TPLF no longer needed to intensify its repressive policy to say in power, which intensification will only lead, sooner or later, to a violent overthrow either by popular uprisings or armed groups. The proposal thus removed the likelihood of a violent overthrow and protected the leaders of the TPLF from political and economic marginalization.

Unfortunately, far from seeking accommodation, all what the TPLF leaders are doing today suggest the recourse to a policy that is set on using all the repressive power of the state to say in power by all means necessary. Recent arbitrary arrests of political leaders and journalists give an unmistakable evidence of the determination to keep power by all means. Add the recent repression to the twenty years of unfruitful peace struggle to have a clear idea of the deadlock of the Ethiopian struggle for change.

In light of this evidence, the question is to know whether peaceful struggle can withstand and eventual defeat a regime that offers nothing but the perpetuation of its absolute power. If one is convinced that the TPLF will never tolerate the rise of a strong democratic opposition, then what is left but the path of a violent overthrow? If the answer is yes––I do not see how a different answer could be possible––what else is endorsed but the inevitability of a violent confrontation whatever form it may take? But then, the inevitability of violence rehabilitates armed struggle, not only as the only recourse but also as the one that offers the possibility of victory. If one is convinced, I repeat, that the TPLF will never give up power peacefully, then one supports the idea that violence is inevitable. Accordingly, it makes no sense to postpone the inevitable confrontation by falsely dissuading oneself that a peaceful victorious outcome is possible for the opposition.

Moreover, while there is no doubt that numerous exceptionally courageous and committed political leaders, journalists, and activists have sacrificed their freedom and life to force the TPLF to be faithful to its own constitution, the downside is that the regime ends up by appearing invincible, thereby discouraging other challengers and plunging Ethiopians in a state of utter resignation and submission for a very long time. There is a limit to what a country can sacrifice without any tangible result.

True, armed struggle is also a very dangerous undertaking, but with the major difference that one is not powerless and can inflict real pain to those who stole others’ freedom. I do not deny that peaceful resistance can prevail over the harshest dictatorial regime given enough time, for no regime is everlasting. Unfortunately, what Ethiopia does not have is precisely time. Ethnic politics is tearing the country apart by undermining, slowly but surely, all the legacies of a common history and shared identity. Whether we like or not, new smaller nations are emerging from the ethnic fragmentation of the country. There is clearly an urgent need to stop the bleeding. What is taking place is as damaging as the direct occupation of the country by a foreign power, which would have naturally given rise to an armed resistance. That the loss of Ethiopia is fomented by treacherous natives should not invite a different reaction.

Above all, it seems to me that the only remedy against the resignation and fatalism that reign in the heart of most Ethiopians is the use of a violent form of struggle. Violence forces us to be free. As Frantz Fanon puts it referring to the colonizer, “the appearance of the settler has meant in the terms of syncretism the death of the aboriginal society, cultural lethargy, and the petrification of individuals. For the native, life can only spring up again out of the rotting corpse of the settler.” What this means is that we need violence, not primarily to overthrow the TPLF, but to be worthy of it, that is, to recover the dignity and anger that make submission unacceptable. To the extent that violence is a provocation of a repressive regime, which naturally reacts by indiscriminate violence, it ends the safety of resignation and fear. It puts everybody in the state of survival by all means and so moves the use of violence from choice to necessity. What Ethiopians need urgently is not so much the recognition as the imposition of freedom by using violence to dissolve the security obtained through submission. Make life dangerous, and you force people to join the fight.

Additionally, those who are hired by the TPLF to terrorize the people and the opposition do so because the absence of armed struggle gives them complete immunity and safety. As soon as they understand that they can become the target of violent reaction, their incentive to kill, torture, and maim diminishes drastically. For them too, the threat of violence has an awakening impact, since they are asked to kill and maim persons who, having ceased to be docile, transform their job into a very risky business. The revelation of their own vulnerability is how they commence to think, thereby recovering what they had exchanged for easy money, to wit, the ability to think critically. They now understand that their job is demanding the sacrifice of their own precious life and that the exchange is utterly unfair.

Last but not least, peaceful struggle has the chance to prevail over the regime if the latter is threatened by violent overthrow. Experience shows that even the fiercest dictatorial regimes suddenly call for dialogue and reconciliation when they feel threatened by armed insurgents. The power of violence makes such regimes suddenly reasonable. What this tells us is that we must drop the either/or reasoning that it is hurting us. By vilifying the recourse to violence, we are doing a big favor to the regime in place. What else could better prolong the life of the regime than the opposition condemning the use of violence? It is my belief that peaceful opposition, which we all want to triumph, cannot do so without the backing of armed insurgency. In other words, we must not see peaceful struggle and armed insurgency as mutually exclusive; instead, we should see them as allies working with different means to achieve the same goal.

This idea of partnership needs to be promoted. All the more so as armed struggle by itself, even if it brandished the goal of democratization, cannot achieve it without the support of an organized people. The irreplaceable role of peaceful struggle is that it organizes and educates the people who are the direct participants. Armed insurgency without an organized people would result in nothing else, despite its generous inspiration, than dictatorial rule. If history teaches us one thing is that democracy cannot be imposed and that those who have tried to do so have become the worst dictators. Democracy works only if the people have the clear sense of being the only source of legitimate political authority and have the means to enforce it, namely, organization and leadership. The triumph of an armed insurgency in a situation where the people show some degree of organization is less frightening and to some extent controllable. Such a people can require that the leaders of the insurgency retain power only under the condition that they win at the ballot box through fair and free elections.

To sum up, the question, armed struggle or peaceful struggle, is a false dilemma. These two forms of struggle are actually complementary. Those who are committed to armed struggle should not denigrate peaceful struggle. On the contrary, they must see it as a necessary component of the democratization goal. Inversely, those who are committed to peaceful struggle must stop demonizing armed insurgency; they should rather view it as a necessary condition for the success of their goal. Instead of either/or, our position must be this and that. Let there be no misunderstanding: what I say does not mean that I am walking away from peaceful struggle. I am firm in my belief that democracy is unachievable without the acquisitions of peaceful struggle. I am simply taking note of the fact that, given the political fragmentation of the country and the nature of the TPLF, peaceful struggle by itself is incapable of bringing the TPLF to the negotiation table. I am also firm in my belief that the only way to institute a genuine democracy in Ethiopia is through the inclusion of the EPRDF in the democratic process, as opposed to its exclusion. I do not see how a commitment to peaceful struggle would exclude the EPRDF without recourse to violent repression. The best outcome for Ethiopia lies in a genuine negotiation between all the concerned forces with the understanding that, given the nature of the TPLF, the use of force conditions the occurrence of said negotiation.

Many political parties and organizations lacking unity and common goal have fought hard for decades to end dictatorship in Ethiopia. The ever increasing number of the political organizations and their failure to work together has enabled longevity for the minority dictatorial regime that would and should have been in the dustbin of history long time ago.

We believe it’s about time that all concerned individuals and groups that understand and see the deep hole that our nation finds itself, must pause and reflect on the backbreaking path we traveled and the critical juncture we have reached.

For years, the Ethiopian people have been demanding for a united political front, and we the various political forces that struggle to make the people the only source of power in Ethiopia have envisioned that a united political force and collective struggle is not an option, but an indispensible necessity.

Today, the call of the Ethiopian people for a united political front has been answered with the first and initial step. Our long term vision and desire to create a broader united front that ultimately leads to a strong united Ethiopia has materialized with this initial step. With this initial step, the following three political entities have completed the preconditions to merge their organizations, and have vowed to pay all the necessary sacrifices that the struggle requires to make the Ethiopian people masters of their destiny.

We the three organizations that have reached an agreement towards the merger are:

We want to let the Ethiopian people and friends of Ethiopia know that we the undersigned organizations have agreed to work together in all aspects and facets of the struggle during the transition period. Unity is power!!!

On April 10, 1957, 28 year-old Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (MLK) gave a speech at the St. Louis Freedom Rally in St. Louis, MO entitled, “A Realistic Look at the Question of Progress in the Area of Race Relations”. In his speech, MLK commended St. Louis for integrating its schools in a “quiet and dignified manner”. He said St. Louis could teach the country much about improving race relations: “The Deep South have a great deal to learn from a city like St. Louis. It proves that integration can be brought into being without a lot of trouble, that it can be done smoothly and peacefully.” But MLK’s principal aim was to “grapple with a question that continually comes to [him]. And it is a question on the lips of men and women all over this nation. People all over are wondering about the question of progress in race relations. And they are asking, ‘Are we really making any progress?’”

In August 2014, 57 years after MLK gave his 1957 speech, Ferguson, a town of barely 21,000 souls on the outskirts of St. Louis is in the throes of its own race relations soul searching. On August 9, 2014, Michael Brown, an unarmed 18-year-old black man was fatally shot by Darren Wilson, a 28-year-old white Ferguson police officer. A private autopsy done at the request of Brown’s family showed the teenager was shot at least six times.

The killing sparked days of emotional but largely peaceful protests. A few individuals took advantage of the turmoil by engaging in looting, vandalism and other criminal activities. Dozens were arrested.

The police response was shocking. A contingent of some 150 police officers in riot gear assembled from nearby jurisdictions and confronted protesters in the streets firing tear gas and rubber bullets. Protesters chanted, “Hands up! Don’t shoot!” SWAT teams (Special Weapons and Tactics) clad in heavy body armor and carrying ballistic shields and assault rifles taunted the protesters. Police snipers peered through their night vision optics perched atop behemoth armored vehicles scanning for targets. Missouri Governor Jay Nixon made “operational shifts” to ease the situation by deploying Missouri State Highway Patrol, imposing a curfew and calling out the National Guard. Is it happening in Falluja, Iraq or Ferguson, U.S.A.? It was surreal!

Lesley McSpadden, the victim’s mother declared her expectation, “Arresting this man [officer] and making him accountable for his actions; that’s justice.”

On August 18, 2014, 53-year-old President Obama reflecting on race relations in America in the context of the Brown killing said, “We’ve made extraordinary progress, but we have not made enough progress.” But to hearken back to MLK’s 1957 question, “Are we really making any progress?” MLK’s response at the time was, “We have come a long, long way but we have a long, long way to go.”

I wonder. Have we really made “extraordinary progress” in race relations in America? Have we really come a “long way”? How much “progress” in race relations do we need to make “real” or “extraordinary progress”? How long must we walk to go a long way? Are we making enlightened progress in race relations in America or creating a huge SWAT fortress? Are we taking the long way in the wrong direction on race relations?

In his 1957 speech, MLK said, “there are three basic attitudes that one can take toward the question of progress in the area of race relations.” One can take the “attitude of extreme optimism”. The “extreme optimist would argue that we have come a long, long way in the area of race relations” and point to the “marvelous strides that have been made in the area of civil rights over the last few decades and conclude that the problem is just about solved.” The second attitude reflects “extreme pessimism” and acknowledges “only minor strides in the area of race relations.” The “extreme pessimist” would argue, “we have created more problems than we have solved”’ and that “we are retrogressing instead of progressing”.

MLK advocated “a third position, a realistic position.” The third position “seeks to reconcile the truths of two opposites while avoiding the extremes of both. So the realist would agree with the optimist that we have come a long, long way. But, he would go on to balance that by agreeing with the pessimist that we have come a long, long way but we have a long, long way to go…”

In 2014, I believe MLK’s “third position” is still the “realistic position”. We have come a long, long way from the master’s house on the plantation to the White House. We have used the ballot to make our way to the statehouse and the House of Representatives. Some of us have managed to escape the tenement house for the townhouse and penthouse.

But what is happening in the jailhouse? In the courthouse? In the poorhouse? In the workhouse? In the schoolhouse?

In 1957, MLK laid out the facts:

The poverty of the Negro is still appalling in spite of all of our growth. We must face the fact that forty- three percent of the Negro families of America still make less than two thousand dollars a year. Compare that with the fact that just seventeen percent of the white families make less than two thousand dollars a year. Twenty-one percent of the Negro families still make less than a thousand dollars a year. Compare that with the fact that just seven percent of the white families make less than a thousand dollars a year. Eighty-eight percent of the Negro families of America make less than five thousand dollars a year. Compare that with the fact that sixty percent of the white families make less than five thousand dollars a year. To put it another way, just twelve percent of the Negro families of America make five thousand dollars or more a year, while forty percent of the white families of America make five thousand dollars or more a year. We’ve come a long, long way, but we have a long, long way to go in economic equality.

The problems of discriminatory law enforcement in black communities covers the gamut: random stops and searches and seizures without probable cause or reasonable suspicion, harassment, excessive and unnecessary use of force, unprofessionalism, racial profiling, “driving/walking while black” and other forms of abuse of power. Police abuse and mistreatment of African Americans occurs across varying socioeconomic backgrounds. They happen to “actors, professional football players, college students and even black cops.” It happens even to federal prosecutors. Attorney General Holder recently recounted an encounter he had with police in the Georgetown section of the nation’s capital. “I am running with my cousin. Police car comes driving up, flashes his lights, yells, ‘Where you going? Hold it!’ I say ‘Woah, I’m going to a movie.’ Now my cousin started mouthing off. I’m like, ‘This is not where we want to go. Keep quiet.’ I’m angry and upset. At the time that he stopped me, I was a federal prosecutor. I wasn’t a kid. I was a federal prosecutor. I worked at the United States Department of Justice. So I’ve confronted this myself.”

The problem of arbitrary, unprofessional and unlawful police law enforcement is not just a big city problem. It rears its ugly head even in the smallest towns. According to the Missouri Attorney General’s office, in Ferguson with a population of 15,865 of people over the age of 16, 4,632 blacks were stopped by the Ferguson police department, compared to 686 whites. In 2013, Ferguson police officers stopped 5,384 and made 521 arrests during vehicle stops, of which 483 (93%) were black, and 36 were white. Ferguson is nearly two-thirds black (61%) but its mayor, five of the six city council members, 5 of the 6 school board members are white. Only 3 of the 50-member Ferguson police force are black. The police chief is white.

The lesson is clear and simple. As the U.S. Supreme Court noted in a landmark police search and seizure case, “Nothing can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its own laws.” I would say nothing can destroy the rule of law more catastrophically than the malicious flouting of the rule of law by those sworn to uphold and enforce the law.

How can we move forward a long, long way?

MLK in 1957 said to keep progress going, we need to do several things. “We must continue to gain the ballot. One of the great needs of the hour is for the Negro to gain political power through the ballot.” He underscored the fact that we “have the moral responsibility to use the ballot and use it well and wisely.”

Ferguson is a compelling case vindicating MLK’s admonition that the “hour [is at hand] for the Negro to gain political power through the ballot.” African Americans in Ferguson not only have the ballot to elect their leaders, but more importantly the power to un-elect them. Under Missouri Revised Statutes, Chapter 77, Section 77.650, “The holder of any elective office in a third class city may be removed by the qualified voters of such city by recall petition…” Ferguson is a “third class city” and “Fergusonians” have the legal power to remove from office a holder of municipal elective office.” That way they can apply MLK’s teachings and impose not only accountability on their local government but also change the entire culture of policing in Ferguson. Will the people of Ferguson flex their ballot muscle?

Missouri State Senator Jamilah Nasheed launched an online petition calling for St. Louis County Prosecutor Robert McCulloch to recuse himself from the Michael Brown case on various convincing grounds, including the fact that McCulloch’s father, a policeman, was killed in the line of duty. She reported gathering 70,000 signatures. Her efforts would have been better invested in a recall petition which requires only 25 per cent of registered voters to boot out the mayor, the city council and school board.

MLK advised that “we’ve got to continue to persuade the federal government to use all of its powers to enforce the law of the land.” But for federal civil rights legislation and enforcement actions beginning after the American Civil War, things would have been different under the doctrine of “states’ rights”. Attorney General Eric Holder following his visit to Ferguson declared, “This attorney general and this Department of Justice stands for the people of Ferguson. The people of Ferguson can have confidence in the federal agents, investigators and prosecutors who are leading the process.” Holder’s personal involvement and deployment of federal investigative resources meets MLK’s prescription for effective federal action in moving forward.

MLK said in 1957 that there is a “dire need” “for sound and sane leadership who will lead the people” out of the “wilderness toward the promised land of freedom and justice.” He insisted on the cultivation of not just political leaders but also moral leaders. MLK said we need leaders “in love with humanity” and with “justice” and leaders with humility and not big “egos”. He was crystal clear about the kind of leadership that is not needed. He said “rabble-rousers, whether the rabble-rouser be white or Negro”, leaders who have “extremes of hot-headedness and Uncle-Tomism”, “leaders in love with publicity” and “money” and leaders willing to sacrifice the “greatness of the cause” to the greatness of their “particular egos” are not needed. MLK did not want to see the “rent-a-leader” who shows up “seeking publicity” at the first sign of trouble, run off his mouth and vanish to lead the great cause.

MLK would hold his head in shame if he were to look at our leadership today — gridlocked at the national level, disoriented at the state level and pathetically parochial at the local level. Finding “sound and sane leadership who will lead the people” out of the “wilderness toward the promised land of freedom and justice” in our time is as difficult as it was for Diogenes of Sinope (the cynic) who walked around town in acient Greece with a lamp in hand in broad daylight trying to find an honest man. Where can we find enlightened moral and political leaders who know their own way, know which way is the right way and lead the people on the long, long way to justice? Oh! Where do we find young humble moral leaders in America who are “in love with humanity” and “justice”?

MLK called for peaceful mobilization and action in 1957. He “called upon every freedom-loving Negro, from all over the nation, who can get off of work that day to come to Washington for a Pilgrimage of Prayer for Freedom. We are not going there to make any threats. We are not going there to say what you have to do. We are simply going there to thank God for what has already been done and to ask Him for His guidance through the other period of transition, and to appeal to the conscience of the nation to do something… We are not fighting for ourselves alone, but we are fighting for this nation.”

If MLK were alive in 2014, he would have wholeheartedly called upon every freedom-loving American to take a Pilgrimage for Love and Peace. Every freedom-loving American — without regard to race, color, religion, ideology or creed – needs to join the Pilgrimage and “appeal to the conscience of the nation to do something” about injustice, and fight for the soul of this nation.

“We must have sense in this world:We must not use violence”

MLK said we have got to do it right and do right by each other. “Let us be sure that our methods are thoroughly moral and Christian. I know it’s really hard when we think of the tragic midnight of injustice and oppression that we’ve had to live under so many years, but let us not become bitter. Let us never indulge in hate campaigns, for we can’t solve the problem like that. Somebody must have sense in this world. And to hate for hate does nothing but intensify the existence of hate in the universe. We must not use violence. Maybe sometimes we will have to be the victims of violence, but never let us be the perpetrators of violence. For if we succumb to the temptation of using violence in our struggle, unborn generations would be the recipients of a long and desolate night of bitterness, and our chief legacy to the future will be an endless reign of meaningless chaos. We must not use violence.”

It is not about race or color; it is about man’s inhumanity to man

As an Ethiopian immigrant and unapologetic American constitutional lawyer, political scientist and human rights advocate who has proudly made his home in America, I wish I could honestly say that what has happened in Ferguson is simply a matter or race and skin color. I have to broaden my perspective of government wrongs and human rights beyond America. What I see in Ferguson and in similar circumstances elsewhere in America is undoubtedly about race – the inhumanity of the human race.

Man’s inhumanity to man is not a uniquely American problem. It is a human problem everywhere. Police brutality is only one virulent mutation of the global culture of inhumanity fueled by violence. It is a culture that permeates police departments throughout the world. It breaks my heart and I hold my head in shame when I say man’s inhumanity to man manifests itself in its extreme ugliness all too often in Africa, the cradle of humanity millions of years ago which today has become the graveyard of human rights.

In May 2014, the police and security officials of the ruling regime in Ethiopia massacred 47 unarmed university and high school students in the town of Ambo 80 miles west of the capital Addis Ababa. There has been little international outrage over the massacres and no one has called for an investigation. In 2005, security and police officials under the personal command and control of the late leader of the regime in Ethiopia massacred 193 unarmed demonstrators indiscriminately and grievously wounded 761. Even though 237 of these police killers are known by name, they have yet to be brought to justice. There was no international outcry. The security, police and military forces of the current regime in Ethiopia have massacred thousands of civilians in the Ogaden and Gambella regions of Ethiopia and elsewhere in that country. The U.S. government is the principal financial and political supporter of this bloodthirsty regime!

In August 2012, South African police massacred 34 mineworkers in cold blood in Marakina in the North West province of South Africa evoking memories of apartheid South Africa. The Youtube video of that massacre is as shocking as any ever posted. The Marikana Massacres were reminiscent of the Sharpeville Massacre of apartheid South in 1960. To add insult to injury, the National Prosecuting Authority of South Africa brought murder and other charges against the surviving Marakina miners. In Darfur, Liberia, Sierra Leone, the Central African Republic, Mali, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and elsewhere in Africa, extrajudicial killings by regime security and police officers are so commonplace that the world has turned its face to avoid having its mind and heart scarred forever.

As I see it, the problem is an undiagnosed mental illness which afflicts most of humanity. It is called violence (the end product of anger, hate, hopelessness, despair, indignity, injustice, irrational fear, ignorance, etc.). Violence is a sickness of the soul. It is an illness that keeps the majority of humanity in a permanent state of delusion. It is an illness that makes us believe we can solve our problems by killing, torturing, abusing and shooting our enemies.

Violence has made us make gods out of guns. The rule of gun has upended the rule of law in many places. We have militarized our police and equipped them with armored vehicles, assault rifles, night vision goggles, stun grenades and other weapons obtained from U.S. military surplus. Violence has enabled the inmates to take over the insane asylum and run the rest of the world. We need a cure for that mental illness because, as MLK taught us, “violence is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it. Through violence you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth. Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate. Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars.” Power does not come out of the barrel of the gun; it comes from the good will of people.

There is no underestimating the fact that police face vicious drug dealers and gangsters, bank robbers and lunatics sporting AK-47s, Uzis, M-16s and other weapons of war in their line of duty. It is irrational to condemn all police officers on the misdeeds of some members. With hundreds of millions of guns in American homes and streets, the police have a reasonable fear of becoming victims of gun violence at some point in their careers. Reasonable people will agree that the police do not have an easy job; they have a very challenging job. But the fact of the matter is that no police officer ever signed to become a peace officer’s because it is an easy job. I do not doubt that some individuals became police officers driven by their own demons of hate and bigotry. For them, a police badge is a license to kill and to abuse citizens they despise. However, peace among the citizenry cannot be secured by a small group of police officers waging war on the people. Every police officer must live up to the promise of “to protect and serve”.

Unfortunately, the police culture in the U.S., the curriculum in the police academies and the general mindset in police communities encourages police officers to look at poor communities of color, particularly in urban areas, as war zones and its citizens as potential terrorists to be contained by SWAT teams and snipers. As a result, police officers who do not live in the communities they police perform their jobs with fear and loathing. Policing of poor communities becomes a “tactical” problem instead of a community policing problem. Citizens of color are presumed to be violent criminals until proven otherwise. “Tactically”, the police shoot first and answer questions later.

The answer lies in community policing (community-police partnership to deal with public safety problems), not aggressive militarized policing. The answer lies in deconstructing the current police culture which feeds on racism and reconstructing it on the basis of human dignity and respect. The answer lies in truth (fair and full investigation) and reconciliation (community healing by bring together the police and the community together to discuss grievances incurred over the years and decades and find ways of going forward together). Prosecution of one police officer is not enough; holding an entire police department publicly accountable is a part of the answer. A psychological change is also needed: All citizens in the community should feel that they own the police department and no segment of the community should feel police force is an occupying force imposed on them.

We have met the enemy

To paraphrase Pogo (comic strip), I believe “We the People have met the enemy and it is us.” The questions we must answer are clear: Will we make peace with or wage war on the enemy? Do we annihilate or rehabilitate and redeem the enemy? Do we vanquish or reconcile and make friends with the enemy? Do we love the enemy?!

In 2009, in a speech during Black History Month, Attorney General Holder said, “Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and I believe continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards.” Americans must show that America is still the land of the free and home of the brave. The real question is what brave Americans – white, black, brown and all shades in between – will do when they meet the enemy. How brave Americans decide what to do with the enemy will determine if we will go a long, long way on our long walk to justice as a nation and as a people or take a detour into the abyss of strife, discord and conflict as depraved brutes. The choice belongs to every American. The buck stops with every American. As President John F. Kennedy said in his Civil Rights address in 1963, it is time for a “peaceful revolution”:

The fires of frustration and discord are burning in every city, North and South, where legal remedies are not at hand. Redress is sought in the streets, in demonstrations, parades, and protests which create tensions and threaten violence and threaten lives. We face, therefore, a moral crisis as a country and a people. It cannot be met by repressive police action. It cannot be left to increased demonstrations in the streets. It cannot be quieted by token moves or talk. It is a time to act in the Congress, in your State and local legislative body and, above all, in all of our daily lives. It is not enough to pin the blame on others, to say this a problem of one section of the country or another, or deplore the facts that we face. A great change is at hand, and our task, our obligation, is to make that revolution, that change, peaceful and constructive for all.Those who do nothing are inviting shame, as well as violence. Those who act boldly are recognizing right, as well as reality.

Progress is “Going Forward by Going Backward”

In April 1954, MLK gave a sermon entitled, “Going Forward by Going Backward” at Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, AL. He said, “Our problem lies in the fact that through our scientific genius we have made of the world a neighborhood, but through our moral genius we have failed to make of it a brotherhood. And the great danger confronting us today is not the atomic bomb that we can put in an airplane and drop on hundreds and thousands of people, but the atomic bomb which we have to fear today is that atomic bomb which lies in the hearts and souls of men, capable of exploding into the vilest of hate and into the most damaging selfishness.” He cautioned, “if our civilization is to go forward today, we must go back and pick up those precious moral values that we have left behind…”

There is no doubt that Americans have made “extraordinary progress” in the sciences and technology and achieved great economic prosperity. But we are struggling to make moral progress in how we treat and deal with each other. We keep the world’s greatest financial, scientific, educational and technological centers. But we have a long, long way to go to become our brother’s and sister’s keeper.

The human race on the planet is in a race to save itself from itself. It also looks like it is in a desperate race to destroy itself. In the human race, humanity must unlearn to beat each other and learn to beat its “swords into plowshares and its spears into pruning hooks”. We cannot dehumanize each other and expect to improve humanity. There is less humanity left in a dehumanized human. In the human race, there can only be one winner — (Wo)Man or all of humanity will be the loser. We must find a million ways to overcome man’s inhumanity to man. The alternative is foretold in the verse of Robert Burns.

Many and sharp the num’rous ills Inwoven with our frame! More pointed still we make ourselves Regret, remorse, and shame! And man, whose heav’n-erected face The smiles of love adorn, –Man’s inhumanity to man Makes countless thousands mourn!

In 1957, MLK said St. Louis could teach the country a lot about race relations. In 2014, the people of Ferguson could teach America a lot as well. I will know class is in session when the people of Ferguson stop raising their hands and stop crying out “don’t shoot” and the Ferguson police stretch out their hands to the people of Ferguson for a handshake.

As I see America through immigrant lenses, I do not just see the United States of America. I see the united peoples of humanity. I see people from every country and every corner of the planet who have come to America escaping political and religious persecution or seeking better economic opportunities. Like millions before me, I am one of the “huddled masses” who came and stayed in America “yearning to breathe free”. Millions throughout the world would give up a limb and then some to come and live in America. I see an imperfect union of humanity in the United States of America. We have problems, too many problems. But we cannot solve our problems in the executive offices of the White House, the state houses, the halls of Congress or the chambers of the U.S. Supreme. The answers to our problems lie dormant in the chambers of our hearts. We can achieve a more perfect union by living out the truth of our fundamental values (which we often preach and practice less often) and declare independence from the racism, sexism, xenophobism, communalism and all of the other –isms that secretly hide in our hearts and minds and “submit to a candid world” that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men and women are created equal…”

“Are we really making any progress?” asked MLK in 1957. My answer in 2014 consists of a series of questions: What is the true measure of progress? How far we have come on the economic and political scale? Should we not measure progress by how much we have narrowed the gap between our hearts and minds? How do we measure the gulf that hate has created between our hearts and minds? Shouldn’t the true measure of progress be the number of bridges of love we have built to connect the long, long way from our hearts and minds? Should not the true measure of progress be our commitment as Americans to go a long, long way to make our imperfect union a more perfect union?

=========

“I’ve been doing this since I was a teenager. I didn’t think I would have to do it when I was 90. We need to stand up today so that people won’t have to do this when they’re 90.” Hedy Epstein, a 90-year-old Holocaust survivor arrested in St. Louis protesting Missouri Governor Jay Nixon’s decision to activate the National Guard for deployment in Ferguson.

“I prefer peace. But if trouble must come, let it come in my time, so that my children can live in peace.” Thomas Paine

=========

Professor Alemayehu G. Mariam teaches political science at California State University, San Bernardino and is a practicing defense lawyer.

Five independent magazines and a weekly newspaper have been charged by Ethiopia’s Justice Ministry, a move that may add to the long lists of shuttered publications and Ethiopian journalists in exile. In a press release issued August 4, the ministry accused the journals of publishing false information, inciting violence, and undermining public confidence in the government, news reports said.

The ministry said it pressed charges after running out of patience with the publications for “encouraging radicalism and terrorism.” The state broadcaster aired the ministry’s announcement, but none of the publications received the charge sheet, local journalists told me. The six independent publications are Afro Times,a weekly newspaper,and magazines Addis Guday, Enku,Fact,Jano, and Lomi. All are popular alternatives to the state-run press, which espouses an increasingly positive narrative. Local journalists and news reports said the charges could be a way for the ruling party to silence critics ahead of elections expected in May 2015.

Repeated calls to the Justice Ministry and a government spokesman went unanswered.

The ministry’s charges are not unexpected. In February, the pro-government Ethiopian Press Agency, a state-controlled news wire, conducted a study analyzing the content of the publications and concluded they were responsible for inciting violence and upholding opposition viewpoints, according to local news reports. Many local journalists at the time said they feared the study would be used as a pretext to target the publications later. “It’s a strategy the government uses when they want to stop a newspaper,” Habtamu Seyoum, an editor at popular magazineAddis Guday,told me by phone. “They will prepare an article claiming that a journalist or media house should be closed. The next step is to jail or close the media house; it’s done as a sort of formality.”

The Justice Ministry’s charges reflect a trend of authorities silencing critical media. Since 2009, the government has banned or suspended at least one critical independent publication per year, according to CPJ research.

Addis Guday stopped publishing on August 9. Several staff went into exile shortly after the government announcement, fearing imminent arrest. CPJ research shows their fears are likely justified. “We had police surrounding our offices, insults printed by the government press, constant phone threats–and now [these charges]. It was just too much,” Addis Guday Deputy Editor Ibrahim Shafi told CPJ. A week before the staff members fled, police raided their offices twice in one week, ostensibly to investigate financial records, he said.

The country’s politicized justice system coupled with the ruling party’s near zero-tolerance approach to criticism has led a steady flow of journalists to flee the country. CPJ has directly assisted at least 41 journalists fleeing Ethiopia since 2009, and the total number of exiles is likely higher. Those who have fallen out of favor with authorities, whether from independent or state media, feel exile or imprisonment are their only options.

Authorities arrested another Addis Guday editor, Asmamaw Hailegeorgis, in Aprilon terrorism charges, and arrested photojournalist Aziza Mohamed in July on vague accusations of incitement. Ethiopian authorities have a penchant for sentencing journalists to jail after presenting charges, no matter how spurious the charges may be. Data collected from the registrar of Ethiopia’s Federal High Courtsuggest 95 percent of journalists accused by authorities are found guilty, according to TrialTrackerBlog.org, which publishes news about detained journalists in Ethiopia.

Lomi (“Lemon”) failed to print on August 8 and is unlikely to do so again, local journalists told me, because printers fear publishing anything that has fallen out of the ruling party’s favor. Last month, police searchedLomi‘s offices and accused the staff of working without a license, a charge they denied, local journalists said.

According to the state-run Addis Admas, all but one of the magazines failed to publish recently.

A court in the capital, Addis Ababa, summoned the general managers of three publications–Fact, Addis Guday, and Lomi–on August 13, but only the general manager of Lomi appeared, according to news reports. Local journalists told CPJ they expect the other three publications to be summoned to court soon.

CPJ was not able to reach journalists from Afro Times, Enku, Fact, or Jano.

If these publications close down due to this latest government challenge, Ethiopia’s meager circulation of weekly independent publications–roughly 60,000 for a population of 90 million people–will decrease further. There is only one television station, run by the state, and out of five radio stations, three are staunchly pro-government. The state-run telecommunications company is the sole Internet service provider for a country with the second lowest Internet penetration rates in sub-Saharan Africa, according to the International Telecommunication Union. With limited independent voices, voters’ access to critical news sources and informed debate ahead of Ethiopia’s May 2015 elections may be negligible. The ruling party would probably not want it any other way.

[Reporting from Nairobi]

Tom Rhodes is CPJ’s East Africa representative, based in Nairobi. Rhodes is a founder of southern Sudan’s first independent newspaper. Follow him on Twitter: @africamedia_CPJ

I HAVE A DREAM

BY DANIEL TESFAYE
WE Ethiopians have a dream

WE Ethiopians have a dream………..
…..one day our countery belong to one of the richest countery.
We have a dream………
…..one day our countery will be free from dictator government.
We have a dream………
…..one day our countery will be democrat countery.
We have a dream…..
…..one day all poltical prisoners in Ethiopia will be free from prison.
We have a dream…..
…….one day we can live together in our countery with peace and unity
If We need our dream to come true ,we have to struggle together in order to get rid off one of the worst and dictator EPRDF government from our countery.